Page 2 of 2 [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

31 Jul 2015, 12:30 am

Cato Publius wrote:
AlexandertheSolitary wrote:
Thank for starting this thread on the importance of philosophy, Cato Publius. Could you clarify which aspects of the ideology of liberalism you consider especially pernicious? The term is used in a number of different contexts with a number of different meanings.

I thought that Locke himself was a philosopher? It seems paradoxical to attack the very basis from which he could reason to reach the conclusion to attack philosophy in the first place.

It is good to be reminded that this forum is not for religion and politics alone, but also philosophy.


When talking about liberalism in this case I am talking about classical liberalism; in which the individual is the utmost importance, essentially capitalism. And to my understanding, Locke was more concerned with what modest things philosophy could improve, my stance is that philosophy can solve more profound issues than the "conveniences" of human life.

Also the essay is a work in progress, and is currently far too long to upload on a forum-type website.


Thank you for the clarification, although I would have thought that capitalism was an economic system. It is obviously not unrelated to classical liberalism and the emphasis on the individual - particular understandings often pair individual liberty and the right for private enterprise to be able to carry out business without excessive regulation or government intervention, but in practice surely this is more complex; human beings are surely both individuals and relational beings who exist in communities; frequently both extreme laissesz faire capitalism and over-regulated command economies have deleterious effects upon both individual freedom and social justice within the wider community (I hope the nuance does not appear to much as though I am "sitting on the fence" or refusing to take sides, it is just that it appears to me that many interpretations of what were perfectly sensible philosophies can overlook historic changes and consequences for real people, and that as philosophers such things should at least be taken into account, while not compromising one's overall stance and principles. It often seems to me that many modern political parties and movements are uneasy alliances of factions that agree on some issues, and are prepared to cooperate together against ideological opponents (to an extent that is healthy, I am just worried about some specific issues where debates seemed to be framed in a partisan way that has real effects on policies that have consequences (sorry that it is probably getting somewhat vague there, I may need to explain myself more clearly in response to further questions).


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

31 Jul 2015, 12:48 am

Cato Publius wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
It doesn't have to be an either/or thing. Philosophy is scalable. :D

Back in the day (the classical period), philosophy was used as a tool by individuals, showing them how to live a good life. As you might be able to tell from my avatar, I'm quite interested in Roman Stoicism.

This philosophy is definitely concerned with the "modest concerns" of everyday life, but Stoics were also obliged to do public service and the philosophy definitely informed how they went about it.

I think a bigger threat to philosophy and the way it is perceived today has to do with how abstract and extreme it can become. Often it amounts to so much mental masturbation, and many folks discount it because they don't see it as relevant to their daily lives.


I'll agree with that. The scope of this essay, however, is political philosophy. And, in my opinion, if since the 16th century even political philosophers themselves have said that they can only solve everyday issues, then I see an issue with that. As then no political philosopher will attempt to radically change the system, even though they may envision a better one. There are exceptions since the 16th century of course, especially if you consider the Federalist Papers as a somewhat philosophical work; but for the most part, it seems that now-a-days political philosophy just gives rise to ideologies that people live by while still living in the current system, no matter how corrupt it really is.

I am young, however, and still have much studying and learning to do over this whole, broad, area, so read what I say with that in mind, I could be misunderstanding things.


Indeed, if it is assumed from the outset that philosophers can only help with some areas of life, then there is a real danger that there will not even be any attempt to respond to such areas. It is indeed a worry that philosophy should appear to be removed from human life, when in Classical, Mediaeval, and Renaissance periods - and beyond, although some later Enlightenment and revolutionary philosophies' impact on politics may have had mixed results as far as political history goes) much philosophy was in differing ways directly related to how humans are to live (including, at least for many philosophers such as the Stoics, how we are to live as citizens in terms of active engagement with politics - though others such as the Epicureans (generalising somewhat here) may have decided that on the whole politics might be best avoided. In any case, how we are to live as humans surely affects us all, and differences of opinion as to how best to do this do not change the imperative, but rather add the issue of how we are to respond to one another (I hope I am not becoming a little too unclear by the way, please question or confront if you think I am being too abstract or just plain impenetrable or pretentious).


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

31 Jul 2015, 12:55 am

GoonSquad wrote:
It doesn't have to be an either/or thing. Philosophy is scalable. :D

Back in the day (the classical period), philosophy was used as a tool by individuals, showing them how to live a good life. As you might be able to tell from my avatar, I'm quite interested in Roman Stoicism.

This philosophy is definitely concerned with the "modest concerns" of everyday life, but Stoics were also obliged to do public service and the philosophy definitely informed how they went about it.

I think a bigger threat to philosophy and the way it is perceived today has to do with how abstract and extreme it can become. Often it amounts to so much mental masturbation, and many folks discount it because they don't see it as relevant to their daily lives.


Indeed, much of the Stoic attitude (I realise that Stoicism is more complex than that, I am probably over-simplifying and in any case I lack detailed knowledge of this movement in many ways) seems to me to have a healthy balance between awareness of what cannot be changed while not using that as an excuse for extreme detachment and non-involvement in society, while at the same time seeking to respond reasonably without allowing one's judgment to be impaired by overly-emotional responses - which has obvious benefits for political life as well as human life in general.


_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."


Grebels
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2012
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 545

31 Jul 2015, 4:30 am

Cato, I would like to read more of your work. You show a refreshing desire to get to truth rather than just play with words. I also like the fact that you write in a way understandable to common readers like me.



slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 111
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,420
Location: Dystopia Planetia

31 Jul 2015, 10:59 am

I note that Cato has not posted since May 18, 2015, and has not signed in since May 25, 2015.

Idk if he will return.